Talk:Sadi
Name Problem Chan is an honorific. It's not part of her name Drunk Samurai 02:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC) :It actually is as サディちゃん = Sadi-chan.Mugiwara Franky 05:38, 7 February 2009 (UTC) :So if her name is "Sadi-chan", then does that mean if we were to add an honorific, it would be something like Sadi-chan-chan or Sadi-chan-san? Yatanogarasu 13:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC) "She also tends to add an "mmmmm--!?" in the middle of her sentences, and insists to be addressed as "Sadi-chan"." That line says otherwise. She wouldn't "insist" on being addressed as it if it was her name Drunk Samurai 05:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC) :The introbox showed her name plus it was a Marine asking not a regular Impel Down employee, meaning that the Marine apparently mistook it as an honorific.Mugiwara Franky 05:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC) :: When is it EVER stated that "Chan" is actually part of her name? Her name is written as "サディちゃん" with "Sadie" being written in Katakana, and "Chan" being written in Hiragana just like Honoriffics. Oda wouldn't have mixed the two Kana styles if he didn't intend the "Chan" to be taken differently, it would have been "さてぃちゃん”　Or　“サティチャン”.DemonRin 02:30, March 24, 2010 (UTC) :::Ok, since nobody has replied to this in months, I'm going to assume nobody has a counter-argument to what I said and I'm removing the parts of the article that definitively say "The 'chan' is part of her name". The simple fact is that that's just people assuming rather than being something Oda said, so the smartest route is to not have a position one way or the other on it. DemonRin 23:54, June 4, 2010 (UTC) There's no evidence her name is Sadi-chan. If I remember right what she said was "Call me Sadi-chan" not "Sadi-chan is part of my name. SeaTerror 16:45, April 28, 2011 (UTC) This article should be renamed. I totally support DemonRin's message of March the 24th. The two alphabets would not be mixed up if Sadi-chan was her full name. It still appeared in the infobox, so why wouldn't it be part of her name? 21:08, July 31, 2011 (UTC) :I don't think it's relevant. Shirley's infobox stated "Madame Shirley", Kureha's infobox stated "Dr. Kureha". No reason to make a special case of Sadi. Isn't the -chan an whim of hers? So is part of his character and personality, but not actually her name... I thought Oda emphasized that by putting it in the infobox... but if her name is really Sadi-chan, then she should call herself Sadi-chan-chan... Technically for this very reason we can leave the page as this, but the name is Sadi not Sadi-chan. Oda might add titles to infoboxes, but he doesn't add honorifics. Also, she doesn't have to give herself an honorific when talking in the third person. The name is right. It's just like how people thought Hachi was Hatchan's real name because of the chan at the end of his name. It's the same thing only placed differently. Why else would Oda put it on the infobox if it wasn't part of her name? 21:52, July 31, 2011 (UTC) :Oda adding titles but not honorifics →there is no rule. We know nothing about what Oda accepts and what he doesn't. :Third person thing → I don't get what you mean; isn't the fact that she refers to herself as -chan actually the joke? :Hatchan's name is written all in hirakana, this is not the same thing. :Why Oda would put it in the infobox? Well, it's the way she's referred to by everybody including herself. Kinda like a nickname... This infobox really is no proof, Oda can do whatever he wants. The most relevant element is the mixed up kanas. Yeah, he can do whatever he wants, he could rename Luffy Happy Bunny Flour Pants if he wants. The infobox is proof because there is always a degree of consistency in what he does. You're trying to play Oda by saying there is no rule. The fact that the staff only calls her Sadi-chan is a pun on the fact that they're saying both the name and the honorific at the same time. He did the same thing with Hina. She uses no honorific when she refers to herself in the third person, yet everyone calls her Hina-chan. I know what you're going to say, Hina isn't Sadi-chan. There's still a pattern. 22:14, July 31, 2011 (UTC) I don't really know how Japanese works, but I agree with Sff9. On the other hand, even if the name is Sadi (thus should be renamed) we can follow the joke and leave Sadi-chan, it's not a big deal in this case (there is even the "-")... btw we should totally rename Luffy in "Luffy Happy Bunny Flour Pants"! :DP, you sound like you think I'm of bad faith. Be assured that's not the case. :Everyone calls Hina "Hina-chan", except herself: that seems quite normal to me. That's just an honorific, no reason to put it in the infobox. But as for Sadi, the important thing is that she calls herself Sadi-chan (and also, refuses to be addressed anything else than Sadi-chan). This is not the case for Hina, nor for any other character. :Being the only character to use an honorific this way, we cannot rely on an infobox consistency/pattern about this matter—that's what I wanted to say by "there is no rule", I was not playing Oda in any way. :Moreover, judging from Carlosnet's translation: :::Marine: Referring to herself with "-chan"... is she messing with us...? // GUAHH!! :::Sadi: Silence!!! / You will address me as Sadi-chan!!! :she really asks the marines to address her as Sadi-chan. I don't get the joke if I suppose her name actually is "Sadi-chan". :Plus, names in Japanese do not mix up kana styles. The joke would be that chan is a two in one, a name and the appropriate honorific used at the same time. 23:15, July 31, 2011 (UTC) :I understood that, I meant that the dialog doesn't suit this, in my opinion. If it was the intended joke, it should have been much more clear for the reader that Sadi-chan is her full name, otherwise the joke would fall flat. Even Japanese speakers like Carlosnet did not understand the joke like this (since he uses "Sadi" at the beginning of her lines). Guess some other Japanese-speaker advice would be useful! So why hasn't this been changed yet? SeaTerror 10:04, August 28, 2011 (UTC) Time to bump this up. Chan is only an honorific and not part of her name. SeaTerror 07:11, April 16, 2012 (UTC) she actually calls herself that, to be sure of her name can't some just check page 67 of the blue deep databook.(OnePieceNation 23:26, April 25, 2012 (UTC)) It just means she's arrogant. That doesn't mean its part of her name. SeaTerror 23:28, April 25, 2012 (UTC) we cannot be fully sure about that seaterror. (OnePieceNation 23:35, April 25, 2012 (UTC)) We can. SeaTerror 03:15, April 26, 2012 (UTC) Time to bump this yet again. SeaTerror (talk) 06:15, March 30, 2013 (UTC) Bump. Why hasn't the "chan" been removed yet? WU out - 20:26, July 12, 2013 (UTC) Because it's part of her name, like Hatchan. 22:01, July 12, 2013 (UTC) ^ That's not the same situation at all. 22:03, July 12, 2013 (UTC) As I've read the discussion above, the majority claims it to be nothing but a honorific. And I agree. WU out - 08:17, July 13, 2013 (UTC) It's not, so we won't remove it. 08:22, July 13, 2013 (UTC) If you ignore the fact that her intro infobox, all volume introductions, databook entries, every single time her name is mentioned in-story, and literally every shred of evidence refers to her as Sadi-chan, sure you could come to that conclusion. Even if it was "nothing but an honorific", the fact that it's always present is enough reason to keep the page titled this way. It's kinda like Korosensei from Assassination Classroom - if he was a One Piece character we wouldn't remove his occupation/the sensei honorific from his name and just call him Koro, because "sensei" is such an integral part. 08:28, July 13, 2013 (UTC) http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r598/PiejoFan/unnamed-1.jpg Sorry for the crap quality. Bump. The databook has her title entry as "Sadi-chan" but calls her "Sadi" in the content. Other than this, users above have pointed out logical reasons as to why the "chan" is just an honorific she just insists on being called with and not part of her actual name such as: *You don't mix katakana and hiragana in names. *In Chapter 531, a marine thinks out loud that she must be fooling around by calling her own name with a "chan". Sadi replies in anger with "Shut up and call me Sadi-chan", not "My name is/I am Sadi-chan". *Infoboxes don't always use real names 00:13, August 28, 2015 (UTC) We could remove the honorific and put in her own preference in her personality section or something. I support "Sadi" for the article name, even if personally I will still always call her "Sadi-chan" or "Mistress". 00:49, August 28, 2015 (UTC) If it's like that in the manga too then it should be Sadi alone. It can say something like "prefers to be called Sadichan" in the introduction. Also if it stays with the honorific then the hyphen needs to be removed so the article is Sadichan and not Sadi-chan. Hatchan isn't Hat-chan. SeaTerror (talk) 02:05, August 28, 2015 (UTC) Rename this. 22:04, September 3, 2015 (UTC) Seems like Sadi is the way to go. should we use a bot to rename this? 22:06, September 3, 2015 (UTC) I can go ahead and bot it if it's ok. 22:21, September 3, 2015 (UTC) :Go for it. This page should also get a detailed part about her name in the Translation and dub issues section. Once that and rename are done, we can remove the active discussion section. 15:03, September 4, 2015 (UTC) :I agree on this. Sadi-chan is how she wants to be adressed but her real name is Sadi. Unless it's a legal change of name, like Franky changing compltely his name permanently, it should be simply considered as an alias. It's clear she's not named Sadichan but she's Sadi + chan. :Grievous67 (talk) 15:14, September 4, 2015 (UTC) :So we're clarly renaming her Sadi then, but should we call her also Sadi throughout the article or Sadi-chan? :Grievous67 (talk) 15:17, September 4, 2015 (UTC) :Either works. 15:56, September 4, 2015 (UTC) :What Jopie said. Leaving it as Sadi-chan won't hurt. 16:04, September 4, 2015 (UTC) Should be changed throughout except when she says she wants to be called Sadi Chan. Either way the hyphen needs to go though. SeaTerror (talk) 20:26, September 4, 2015 (UTC) hyphen can stay in the content, now that we've decided that the "chan" is an honorific and not actually part of her name. 22:44, September 4, 2015 (UTC) That makes no sense whatsoever. SeaTerror (talk) 01:20, September 5, 2015 (UTC) Just get rid of it already. This argument is old enough to be in first grade. 05:35, September 7, 2015 (UTC) Current Events The part of her history depicting what she did in Impel Down isn't really part of "current events" anymore. I think it should simply be taken away and combined with the Impel Down Arc section. If nobody minds, I'm just gonna change it. Subrosian 14:36, October 23, 2009 (UTC) yes it should. (OnePieceNation 23:23, April 25, 2012 (UTC)) Name 2 I haven't read the previous discussion, but I wanted to point out that in the Vivre Card teaser she is listed as "Sadi-chan" (サディちゃん). Is that enough to reopen the topic? Rhavkin (talk) 04:00, October 30, 2018 (UTC) I don't think so. Her introduction box has the honorific in it, so if we've decided to not use these honorifics in the page names then I don't think a romanization would change that. We have Tanaka instead of Tanaka-san as the page title even though it was romanized as Tanaka-san in Film Gold. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 04:35, October 30, 2018 (UTC) Then we should change Tanaka to Tanaka-san Meshack (talk) 21:06, October 30, 2018 (UTC) Honorifics are not part of a name. SeaTerror (talk) 21:28, October 30, 2018 (UTC) Domo-kun and Nnke-kun. Rhavkin (talk) 21:37, October 30, 2018 (UTC) "Honorifics are not part of a name." SeaTerror (talk) 21:43, October 30, 2018 (UTC) Do you know how productive discussion work? Rhavkin (talk) 22:19, October 30, 2018 (UTC) I don't think he does. Anyway, their name is officially given with an honorific so we should add the honorific to Sadi and Tanaka Meshack (talk) 23:21, October 30, 2018 (UTC) No they're not. In the manga the honorific is never used as part of her name. Read the previous discussion. SeaTerror (talk) 03:10, October 31, 2018 (UTC) We go by what they're called. Sadi-chan is what she's called. We changed Sanji to Vinsmoke Sanji because he called himself that. It was changed back because he doesn't go by Vinsmoke. Zetto is not Zephyr's name but he goes by it. Sadi goes by Sadi-chan so we should change it to that Meshack (talk) 03:31, October 31, 2018 (UTC) Both Sadi and Tanaka had discussions about what their pages should be titled. So at this point, Domo-kun and Nnke-kun are exceptions, not standard bearers, and their page should probably be renamed as well. Meshack, does this mean we should move Vergo to Vergo-san? Wanting to be addressed with an honorific is different than going by a different name. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 04:25, October 31, 2018 (UTC) Well, officially outside of the series, she is known as Sadi-chan サディちゃん. Vergo isn't called Vergo-san outside of the series Meshack (talk) 05:09, October 31, 2018 (UTC) Yet the manga doesn't. SeaTerror (talk) 09:31, October 31, 2018 (UTC) The manga called her "Sadi-chan" in the introbox. Rhavkin (talk) 13:33, October 31, 2018 (UTC) Damn, SeaTerror Meshack (talk) 17:24, October 31, 2018 (UTC) "Read the previous discussion." SeaTerror (talk) 17:33, October 31, 2018 (UTC) We know she was referred to as Sadi-chan in her introbox. Everyone knows that. That was a thing when her page name was discussed. The point is that the databook referring to her as Sadi-chan doesn't really change anything especially since that name has also been used in previous databooks. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 19:29, October 31, 2018 (UTC) No she wasn't called it in the infobox. An actual Japanese person pointed out how that was wrong. SeaTerror (talk) 20:33, October 31, 2018 (UTC) Well, Oda introduced her as Sadi-chan. You can even see the "chan" in the introduction box. If the Vivre Card Dictionary romanized it as Sadi-chan then we should definitely change the title page. No one is saying "-chan" is part of her name but she is officially called Sadi-chan. I think we should poll this really. 03:04, November 1, 2018 (UTC) Maybe if you actually read the previous discussion as told you would finally realize how no poll is needed. SeaTerror (talk) 03:26, November 1, 2018 (UTC) I did, so continuously saying that is not helping. Meshack (talk) 04:47, November 1, 2018 (UTC)